$92M from parking is back on the table

Downtown development, I-71 interchange revived

Jun. 13, 2013

A number of Cincinnati communities have concerns the city will privatize parking meters. / Forrest Sellers/The Community Press

ADVERTISEMENT

An appeals court ruling Wednesday revived Cincinnati’s hopes for a $92 million windfall that could spark more Downtown development, create thousands of new jobs in Uptown and help balance the city’s budget in the coming years.

But the decision to allow the city to move forward with leasing its parking system to the Port of Greater Cincinnati Development Authority could hurt neighborhood and Downtown businesses and entertainment venues for the next three decades because meter fees and tickets will increase.

“Complete victory for the city,” City Solicitor John Curp told The Enquirer.

A three-judge panel of the Ohio 1st District Court of Appeals, in a complicated decision featuring some dissents, sided with the city, possibly ending a three-month taxpayer legal fight.

Opponents plan to appeal and ask for a stay to stop the city from signing the lease. Curt Hartman, a lawyer for the group, says he plans to email the 1st District Court of Appeals by early today.

City Manager Milton Dohoney said the city would sign the parking deal after receiving the go-ahead from the lower court, which could come within days barring any stay. The plan Dohoney unveiled to City Council in February calling for the port authority and its team of four private companies – known as ParkCincy – to run all meters and city-owned garages and oversee parking enforcement has remained unchanged, port authority spokeswoman Gail Paul said.

Without an appeal to the Ohio Supreme Court and a stay pending the higher court’s decision, the 12,000-plus signatures of registered Cincinnati voters who want to vote on the plan in November would go “out the window,” said Chris Finney, attorney for COAST (Coalition Opposed to Additional Spending and Taxes), which helped lead the push for a referendum.

The NAACP, led by Councilman Christopher Smitherman, and mayoral candidate John Cranley also led the efforts to force a ballot issue.

“Just because a big brother can beat up a little brother doesn’t mean he should,” Cranley told The Enquirer.“Are they really going to make a 30-year decision a couple of months before the election when 12,000 people have asked for a right to vote? We can’t trust (some city leaders). They’ve lost credibility, and they should cease and desist.”

(Page 2 of 4)

At stake: $92 million in up-front money for the city to use for economic-development projects and to help balance the budget the next two years, the ability to pass “emergency” laws and the power of taxpayers to seek referenda.

Some of the up-front money might be used to restore the 63 jobs cut to balance next year’s budget. It’s too soon to know that, said Meg Olberding, Dohoney’s spokeswoman. It would take about 90 days for the parking money to come, she said. Many of the layoffs weren’t effective until September or October anyway.

MAJORITY OF CITY COUNCIL NOW WANTS TO STOP LEASE

Council originally wanted to use some of the $92 million to help plug a $35 million hole in the budget that begins July 1 and adopted the parking lease as an emergency measure to make it effective immediately. After council approved the deal, several citizens filed a lawsuit, saying that council’s adoption of the parking lease plan was against the wishes of most of the public. They also said the city charter required a 30-day window for residents to seek a referendum.

Now, a majority of City Council members want to stop the lease. Laure Quinlivan voted for the lease deal, but said she has changed her mind because the money’s no longer needed for the budget.

Quinlivan and four other council members signed motions Wednesday to repeal the previous lease vote: P.G. Sittenfeld, Charlie Winburn, Chris Seelbach and Smitherman.

But it would take six votes to override a veto by Mayor Mark Mallory, who supports the parking lease.

Mallory said the motion, though signed by a majority of council, would be sent to the proper committee and voted on should that committee leader choose to do so. That committee likely would be Budget and Finance, which is led by Vice Mayor Roxanne Qualls, also a big supporter of the parking lease.

Later Wednesday, Mallory’s aide, Jason Barron, said “the mayor has no intention” of allowing a vote on the parking lease repeal. Quinlivan said she remained hopeful that others would pay attention to it since it was signed by a council majority.

(Page 3 of 4)

NEW APARTMENT, INTERCHANGE COULD NOW MOVE FORWARD

The up-front money would primarily to be used to convert Downtown’s Pogue’s garage into a 30-story apartment building and grocery, a development plan that council approved Wednesday; help build a new interchange at Interstate 71 and Martin Luther King Jr. Drive; and balance the city’s 2014 and 2015 budgets.

The city plans to use $20 million from the parking deal as the local match on the Uptown interchange project. That most likely would assure the project could start on Gov. John Kasich’s timetable of July 2014. Kasich and business and community leaders have called the interchange critical to creating and retaining thousands of jobs in Uptown, the city’s No. 2 jobs center after Downtown. The project has been stalled for more than a decade because of political head-butting between the city and state and a lack of funding.

Dohoney warned, however, that the city would not commit the parking money to any project until there was “legal certainty around the funds.”

The parking plan originally was touted as a way to avoid onerous budget cuts this year, including the layoffs of police and fire. Mallory repeatedly said anyone who signed the referendum petition was signing a pink slip for police and fire.

Police and fire layoffs never materialized when the city balanced the budget last month. The city also has been moving forward with most of the projects, looking at other ways to fund them, regardless of the parking plan.

“The parking deal is still about accelerating the city’s growth to bring more people, more jobs and more revenue to the local economy,” Dohoney said.

HIGHER PARKING FEES CONCERN NEIGHBORHOODS

The lease proposal council approved in March shows money collected from meter fees and tickets would double by 2016.

Opponents have long feared the private companies – including Wall Street investment firm Guggenheim, which would be the bondholder – would lack accountability and aggressively enforce tickets.

City and port authority officials, however, have insisted they will be accountable. For example, the plan calls for the city manager to have an appointee on the ParkCincy advisory team. Additionally, ParkCincy plans to implement technology to help people avoid parking violations. A mobile phone application that would alert a person when a meter is about to expire is in the plans.

(Page 4 of 4)

The numbers indicate enforcement will be stepped up. In 2014, the first full year of the proposed deal, meter fees and ticket revenue are projected to increase from the current $7.3 million to $10.1 million. Projected revenue jumps to $12.7 million in 2015 and $14.3 million in 2016. By 2023, projected meter revenue is $19.1 million. And by 2043, the final year of the deal, meter revenue is estimated to be $29 million.

More than $230 million in meter and ticket enforcement expenses are projected to be paid during the life of the deal. That’s an average of almost $8 million per year. Currently, the city’s meter and enforcement expenses are $2 million.

More than $225 million in debt service is projected.

The plan has been opposed by several neighborhoods, including Clifton, Mount Lookout and Oakley. The fear has been that higher meter rates and an increase in enforcement would hurt neighborhood small businesses.

“Parking enforcement for profit would be similar to any other kind of law enforcement for profit. It inherently rewards aggressive enforcement,” said Ben Pantoja, president of the Clifton Town Meeting. “There is no reason to expect the parking enforcement employees to do anything other than write as many tickets as possible. These parking tickets could drive customers away from neighborhood business districts.”

Peter Hames, president of the Over-the-Rhine Community Council, says he’s worried now that the number of meters could increase in his neighborhood.

That “would be unfair, especially to the residents,” Hames said. “It’s irksome, to say the least.”

Smitherman, the Cincinnati NAACP president who had opposed the parking lease, called the decision “bad news for all 52 neighborhoods.”

“Our teams did all we could to protect our business districts,” Smitherman said.

“Parking in Cincinnati is now in the hands of a third party. Elections have consequences.” ■